Residents and commissioners challenge city's proposed illuminated "Bangor" letters in historic district

City staff presented a proposal March 13 to install large, illuminated letters spelling "Bangor" on the landscaped island at the intersection of State and Harlow streets. The project prompted sustained questioning from Historic Preservation Commission members and more than a dozen public comments, nearly all opposed.

Ian Krieg, director of community and economic development, said the idea originated in earlier staff work and with a community donor (High Tide Capital); the Culture Commission recommended the installation as public art. "We had shelved the project because, COVID hit and, our priorities at a staff level, shifted, dramatically, and so we shelved it," Krieg said, describing why staff recently revived the proposal.

Commissioners and residents concentrated on two central issues: jurisdiction (whether the proposal is "public art" and thus outside the commission's formal review, or whether it is a sign or structure that must come before the Historic Preservation Commission) and the project's practical effects on sight lines, pedestrian safety and the downtown historic streetscape.

Anya (staff) read the municipal code definition supplied in the packet: "Public art. Art that is installed to be visible from a public space in which does not contain characteristics of advertising or identifying or draw attention to a particular business product or service." That definition was a focal point of the debate, because if the installation is classified as public art it would not require the commission's certificate of appropriateness under the code as presented to the commission.

Commissioners pressed staff on process and precedent. Peter Kibler and other commissioners asked who decides when a permanent structure is considered art rather than a sign, and whether the Cultural Commission's recommendation is sufficient to remove the project from the Historic Preservation Commission's review. Commissioners repeatedly asked whether the city's legal department had weighed in; staff said legal review would be appropriate but did not present a formal legal opinion during the meeting.

Practical concerns were raised about safety and maintenance. Commissioners and members of the public said the proposed island location is in a busy, confusing intersection with limited pedestrian space and visibility; multiple speakers urged the city to consider alternative, higher-foot-traffic locations such as the amphitheater area. Staff said engineering reviewed glare and recommended the island location partly because of convenience to existing power, and that two design options were under consideration (a backlit option with lower lumen output and a marquee-style option that is brighter).

More than a dozen members of the public addressed the commission; speakers opposing the project included residents who said the letters would be out of character in the Great Fire of 1911 historic district and would create hazards for pedestrians and drivers. Anna Maria Vayesa told the commission, "Bangor is a gem of a small city...This sign...has nothing to do with the culture or the history of Bangor, and would create a distraction for drivers in this very confusing and busy corner of downtown." Several commenters suggested alternative uses for city resources such as infrastructure repair, building preservation grants or a pollinator garden to complement nearby mural art.

Commissioners noted more than 100 letters were received by city council on the subject and staff said the correspondence forwarded to the commission included both pro and con submissions; staff indicated most council-submitted letters were opposed. No vote or formal certificate-of-appropriateness was taken by the commission at the March 13 meeting because staff presented the item for comment only; commission members sought clarity about process and jurisdiction and asked that their written comments be forwarded to the city council and to other city decision-makers.

Chair Edmond Suresky and other commissioners volunteered to draft a formal statement for a future meeting if commission members wished to register a collective position; staff said it could prepare a draft statement for a future meeting and that the commission could vote on it at a later date. Staff also indicated the Business and Economic Development Committee and City Engineering had been involved in prior review and that the Culture Commission had recommended the concept.